I've migrated the level 1 wizard discussion over to A new thread.
There is a reason that wizards and clerics don't get new abilities every level like the rogue or barbarian.
Hm. From my point of view, a cleric gets two main abilities that progress every two levels (spellcasting and channel energy), plus another couple of minor abilities that progress periodically (two domain abilities at level 1 and level 6/8). And a rogue gets two main abilities that progress every two levels (rogue talents and sneak attack), plus another three minor abilities that progress periodically (evasion, uncanny dodge, trap sense).
There was a treatment of Paladins in Dragon Magazine years ago, for each alignment.
Dragon Magazine, issue #106... cover by Larry Elmore. The article had various Paladins for 1st AD&D, basic NPC classes for CG, NG, LN, TN, CN, LE, and NE paladins. Basically a paladin for every alignment... had various names like Paramander or something like that. Been a very, very long time, so my memory is a bit fuzzy on the details... Um, it seems like I'm suffering from Grognard's Syndrome.
Yes, and if I'm not mis-remembering... they slightly altered their class features to suit their "style". Less armor sometimes, different powers.
I liked the NG Paladin, I think it was The Mehrikan (I thought A-merican) nice! He was like a Paladin/Ranger.
Never got to play it, though... sad. Sniffle, sniffle.
I think the classes that don't have flavour leaping off the page is the best place to start. Having read through the archetypes in the APG Fighter just got so much cooler and more interesting. After that I had a look through the core classes and thought some just seemed so bland. For Wizards and Clerics outside of their school/domain selection there isn't any flavour outside of the spell selection. PF has given them a boost with more domain powers and school powers, but really they're still light in flavour compared to other classes. If you're preparing for the next round I reckon and not sure where to start I'd begin with one of those two.
This round is a real fun one as theres so much you could potentially do. I've already done two and will probably have another up before the announcements of the first round!
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
,
Champion Voter Season 6, Champion Voter Season 7, Champion Voter Season 8, Champion Voter Season 9
|
It seems every archetype I am making is 2/3 of a page long when typed out using Microsoft Office with a size 11 font and normal page layout. I saw one of the replies that said 450 is about 1/2 a page. So what is the page layout dimensions and font type/size Paizo uses?
Even after the contest is over, I am going to use a few of the archetypes in my homebrew. I really can't wait to see what people come up with for round 2...
I think BQ just Jedi mind-tricked us all into working on the until now professed hardest new archetypes.
Problem is, I can't be sure as that was my plan to begin with!
Some crazy idea just popped into my head, "Would it be patently wrong for a Wizard to... Rage?"
I mean if you get over the "when you rage you can't concentrate" nonsense... Caster's Rage! Increases Caster level on the resulting damage dice!
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
,
Champion Voter Season 6, Champion Voter Season 7, Champion Voter Season 8, Champion Voter Season 9
|
I mean if you get over the "when you rage you can't concentrate" nonsense... Caster's Rage! Increases Caster level on the resulting damage dice!
Spell Fury! Randomly cast spells that are prepared...
RPG Superstar 2013
,
Dedicated Voter Season 6, Dedicated Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9
aka Steven T. Helt
|
Hassan, it seems clear you didn't know about this so your idea is original, but there is a rage mage prestige class back in 3.0. I think it was revived in 3.5, and then the rage prophet gives the same barbaric treatment to the oracle in the APG. I'd head off any accusations of 'uninspired' at the pass and work on something totally different.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
,
Champion Voter Season 6, Champion Voter Season 7, Champion Voter Season 8, Champion Voter Season 9
|
I think BQ just Jedi mind-tricked us all into working on the until now professed hardest new archetypes.
I have made seven archetypes so far: 1 wiz, 1 sorc, 1 cler, 1 druid, 1 ranger, 1 figther, 1 rogue
But I am not sure my caster classes are all that balanced. I would really like to play all of them, but not sure if others would feel the lure as well and therein lies the rub. As many others have stated, those are hard classes to do because of the word limit.
Thank you, Steven... I hadn't heared of them (or hadn't remembered), no.
Rage Mage sounded "campy", so I thought Caster's Rage.. now I wish I knew how they were built (just edification). I wasn't intending to do a "rage mage".
But, you say they are a Prestige Class, distinctly different from an archetype by definition. Archetypes have no prerequisites, just go from Level 1.
The trade-off would be the fatigue and an inability to cast spells directly after the Rage. The pro, extending range, adding damage dice, widening area of effect, lengthening duration, etc... Basically, ad-hoc metamagic enhancements while raging (roughly).
Different metamagic at different levels, you'd have to have the feats to begin with. This only allows you to use them in this manner while raging. Certain things at certain levels, of course as with rage powers.
Rage Point cost could be based on the metamagic increase in spell level cost. Some metamagic yes, some no.
That should make for one very simple swap, that could allow alot of variation. Additonally, it can be applied to any school.
Were they like that? :)
It is what it is, someone can take it and run with it... as I said, not my submission.
There is nothing "ridiculous" about raging while casting spells. "Trivial" is probably a better word, at least from the perspective of game balance. Just because it isn't done often doesn't mean it would actually be effective.
A "d12 HD raging creature in front of you that can also cast cure spells and fling fireballs"? The only sense in which this is a "problem" is that it could easily turn out to be a depressingly underpowered character. Even as an Eldritch Knight you're going to want to choose your spells a lot more carefully than that.
Also not an insult, as like you said, we're all works in progress. Just saying. :)
As for whether it's a good idea or not, well, as has been said before, just because it's been done before doesn't mean it can't be awesome. There's always the chance that someone could come along and do for this what Pathfinder did for goblins. Which is why I would rather not discuss it in any greater detail before round 2.
Trivial is more like "bardic music while raging". That's trivial.
Perhaps, but less so than spellcasting. Someone can benefit from rage while also benefiting from their own bardic music (the two will have a compound effect on your damage per round). On the other hand, someone who casts a spell while raging is basically forgoing the primary benefit of their rage by doing something that doesn't use their strength score. Synergy is the name of the game; a 'game breaking' combo is one where the result is more than the sum of its parts, not less.
Now, "has the ability to rage and to cast spells" and "has the ability to cast spells while raging" are two different things. Being able to do both without multiclassing may or may not be powerful, it all depends on what other abilities are given or taken.
I think BQ just Jedi mind-tricked us all into working on the until now professed hardest new archetypes.
Problem is, I can't be sure as that was my plan to begin with!
Some crazy idea just popped into my head, "Would it be patently wrong for a Wizard to... Rage?"
I mean if you get over the "when you rage you can't concentrate" nonsense... Caster's Rage! Increases Caster level on the resulting damage dice!
But its fun right!
BQ, yes!
Now, you other two dudes... keep your eyes on the ball. I feel like I'm playing the shell game. LOL. Just having fun, guys.
We're talking about a Wizard archetype. Invert your thinking. No d12, just lil' ole d6.
We're giving a Wizard the ability to Rage and controlling it through Rage rounds (not points, sorry), this is an existing mechanic.
You can give +1 round per level (or not at all, +0), after all you only need 1 round pretty much, per spell.
We can control what metamagic feats they can use while raging the level at which they are available at.
"A wizard at 5th level can..." so you can't take the really powerful ones early.
The only thing left is what they give up. Arcane Bond, Scribe Scroll and Bonus Feats?
You're affecting the "Wizard Chart" as the "Barbarian Chart" is where Rage Power advancement is (every even level), so maybe this is Sub Class territory. Would love the judges to chime in.
Or, maybe their Bonus Feats (when spent on metamagic feats)... do not allow them to prepare in advance, but can ONLY be used while raging.
I think you can rig it so that the Wizard chart isn't affected.
450 words, might be tight. It's a rough draft, but fun.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
,
Champion Voter Season 6, Champion Voter Season 7, Champion Voter Season 8, Champion Voter Season 9
|
We're talking about a Wizard archetype. Invert your thinking. No d12, just lil' ole d6.
We're giving a Wizard the ability to Rage and controlling it through Rage rounds (not points, sorry), this is an existing mechanic.
Why a wizard might I ask? I think it might be more appropriate for a sorcerer. Wizards are about studying, while the sorcerer casts more from instinct. Aggression Bloodline - Descended from raging barbarians.
Sorcerer could work, but I would caution against tying it to one "bloodline", that's my own hang up.
An archetype should work for any school, bloodline or domain. Again, I'm thinking of it as a "layer" or a template.
But, this doesn't have to be uncontrolled or inherited. This could be a technique that is studied to tap inner energies. Imagine the juxtiposition or paradox of having thisn in an Elf.
Remember Fire & Ice (the animated movie) by Frazetta (sp?)? There was an Ice Lord there. Did sort of this thing.
But, where others cannot focus when they tap their emotions, this wizard is in control... harnessing, guding, aiming, etc... Pushing beyond the limits of normal endurance.
I like paradox, the un-cola. The vampire that sides with humans, the human that sides with the aliens, the Paladin that... ummm, never mind.
:)
But, you're right I'd "expect" it in a Sorcerer. Also, I was starting from the viewpoint of "create a wizard archetype".
Thanks for the input/constructive criticism!
Peace
Sorcerer could work, but I would caution against tying it to one "bloodline", that's my own hang up.
An archetype should work for any school, bloodline or domain.
But it doesn't have to. Look at some of the Ranger archetypes.
Agreed it doesn't have to... Just an opinion. Keeps you from having to justify why this one and not that one.
In the above example: you could hook it to Fey, give her a longsword and go the Elf God (he who shall remain nameless) route.
I'm not telling anyone right and wrong, just explaining a path I can see.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32
|
For round 2, is someone allowed to do an archetype+?
For example, the barbarian gets a number of archetypes. In addition it also gets rage powers that are thematically linked to the archetype.
Rage doesn't get replaced with something, but the barbarian who chooses the Elemental Kin archetype can also choose the Elemental Rage powers.
I can see how the answer to this question could be "the rules will say," or "you're responsible to figure it out yourself," or "while the APG created thematically linked class features, feats, and archetypes, the goal for this round is to create just an archetype."
But I wanted to throw that question out there anyway.
EDIT: this doesn't apply solely to the barbarian. It also applies to a new complementary order, domain, bloodline, etc. I like how these class features are optional and versatile, and not required. They exist outside the archetype itself, but they are integral to playing a character of that archetype.
some input towards your "raging wizard"
stop calling it rage, make it some sort of intense mental focus that temporarily raises their CL or DC's, but then exhausts them afterwords. should also lower AC or something, cause the wizard is so focused he can't pay attention as well to other things.
same idea, new mechanic. I picture the wizard going all red in the face with a bulging vein on his forehead....
thats my thought...everyone here including yourself is stuck on the barbarian rage, I say going with a mental focus that is exhausting. This should substitute for their chosen schools or arcane bond abilities.
I agree whole-heartedly, except... then it wouldn't be rage. It even affects their AC, like you mention.
We'd be reinventing the wheel.
The mechanics are there, the powers are there, these are just new rage powers (for spell casters, could be a cleric version, too).
I love it, but have my heart set elsewhere. Tip of the iceberg my friend... archetypes... GALORE!
If no one is running with this, I'll consider it my alternate... in case my other one doesn't flesh out (no, not a fleshcraft hint).
BTW, I want it to be rage. Not, by any means saying it "cannot" be something else, it could.
okay...just don't really see the point of that, what sort of archetype would that be..besides...
While in rage, a barbarian cannot use any Charisma-, Dexterity-, or Intelligence-based skills (except Acrobatics, Fly, Intimidate, and Ride) or any ability that requires patience or concentration.
you would need a rage power just to be able to cast any spell. ie moment of clarity....
I just don't see meshing barbarian rages into a wizard to be very superstar to be honest, so I'm glad you have others in mind.
A lot of the archetypes out there already re-invented the wheel at times, so it can be a good idea.
Personally I like the idea more and makes more sense of a mental focused wizard with a mechanic that similar in execution but different in function than rage.
other wise I see..."my wizard rages and activates clarity of mind, then uses rage power X to cast spell with bonus X" then you either end rage and become exhausted or your continue raging and go into melee? Even the rage prophet prestige class doesn't get the ability to cast cure spells while raging until a few levels in.
Chief Technical Officer
|
For round 2, is someone allowed to do an archetype+?
For example, the barbarian gets a number of archetypes. In addition it also gets rage powers that are thematically linked to the archetype.
Rage doesn't get replaced with something, but the barbarian who chooses the Elemental Kin archetype can also choose the Elemental Rage powers.
I can see how the answer to this question could be "the rules will say," or "you're responsible to figure it out yourself," or "while the APG created thematically linked class features, feats, and archetypes, the goal for this round is to create just an archetype."
But I wanted to throw that question out there anyway.
EDIT: this doesn't apply solely to the barbarian. It also applies to a new complementary order, domain, bloodline, etc. I like how these class features are optional and versatile, and not required. They exist outside the archetype itself, but they are integral to playing a character of that archetype.
If I were you, I wouldn't do anything we don't specifically ask you to do. (Even if it *were* ok, your word count is precious.)
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32
|
If I were you, I wouldn't do anything we don't specifically ask you to do. (Even if it *were* ok, your word count is precious.)
Good answer Vic.
I'll be curious to say how the next round rules are phrased exactly, but I think you're right that it's a good idea to focus.
Though I'd like to see archetypes designed with other class features, feats, spells, etc thematically linked, RPGSS is probably the wrong place for exploring some of those options.
One of the auto-reject rules was: "don't use real world names". Are there any limitations on what names we can use from mythology and/or folklore?
If you have to, I would suggest selecting an appropriate name from the Golarion mythos.
Note that we mean actual archetypes, not new domains, subdomains, alternate classes or subclasses (such as the antipaladin), sorcerer bloodlines, or wizard schools.
I apologize if this has already been asked and answered but in reference to the above... while making an alternate/variant/subclass is obviously out of the question.... what about making an archetype For the new Antipaladin Base Class? Is that fair game?
The Pathfinder modules and adventure paths use a lot of mythology and folklore. My concern is that basing my (possible) entry for round two on existing tales would maybe be considered unoriginal or "not superstar material".
|
I apologize if this has already been asked and answered but in reference to the above... while making an alternate/variant/subclass is obviously out of the question.... what about making an archetype For the new Antipaladin Base Class? Is that fair game?
Note that we mean actual archetypes, not new domains, subdomains, alternate classes or subclasses (such as the antipaladin), sorcerer bloodlines, or wizard schools.
They haven't given the complete rules yet. But, for right now, the new APG base classes are fair game. And will probably be a popular choice.
I think the Anti-Paladin is a subclass, and not a base class. Could be wrong.
Can we build an archeytpe for a subclass? Dunno.
I can see this being cool, but possibly a bit too specialized? Not sure how to say it.
You mean like a treatment for each of the 4 horsemen of the apocalypse for the anti-paladin?
Judges will have to tell us.
|
|
I think the Anti-Paladin is a subclass, and not a base class. Could be wrong.
Can we build an archeytpe for a subclass? Dunno.
I can see this being cool, but possibly a bit too specialized? Not sure how to say it.
You mean like a treatment for each of the 4 horsemen of the apocalypse for the anti-paladin?
Judges will have to tell us.
Oh that's true, just looked that up. When he said base class, I was thinking it was a base class. The Anti-Paladin is already an Arch-type for the Paladin. Not sure if you wanna do an Arch-type for an Arch-type. :) But, the Alchemist, Cavalier, Inquisitor, Oracle, Summoner and Witch should be fair game unless the rules end up stating differently.
We've never done archetypes before in RPG Superstar, so we don't have a "don't do this" list like we do after 4 years of magic items.
|
|
We've never done archetypes before in RPG Superstar, so we don't have a "don't do this" list like we do after 4 years of magic items.
Well, that's not true. You state we can't do new domains, subdomains, alternate classes or subclasses (such as the antipaladin), sorcerer bloodlines, or wizard schools. So you do have some "don't do this". :)
Well, true -- but one amounts to the rules of the round and one amounts to "best practices" within those rules.
Granted, it does seem like there are some rules that contestants don't necessarily know the details of yet.
Exactly. The idea of an archetype is to allow a player who could play a certain way within the existing rules the ability to do those things better.
For instance, before archetypes a bard could have used his inspire confidence to mock his enemies and make his allies feel better about themselves. Now, they can instead take the court bard archetype to mock their enemies for a different effect in a similar strain.
A new school/bloodline/domain/mystery/etc isn't a way to play within the existing rules, it's a new rule. More of a 'why don't you play this way' rule instead of a 'sure, and why don't you also'.
Granted, it does seem like there are some rules that contestants don't necessarily know the details of yet.
But they did say "no twist." So there might be some general guidelines or a handy-dandy FAQ, but I think that other than "design awesome stuff!" and "be creative and precise", I don't think the round rules are likely to have much in the way of groundbreaking revelations.
I think the Anti-Paladin is a subclass, and not a base class. Could be wrong.
The Anti-Paladin is already an Arch-type for the Paladin. Not sure if you wanna do an Arch-type for an Arch-type.
While I know it's more semantics than anything, "sub" tends to imply less than a full 20 level Class, which the Antipaladin is not... It's a full 20 levels so shouldn't it qualify as it's own "Base Class" for such purposes even if it is another "type", "archetype" even? Though it's definitely not the same sort of archetype rules-wise--it's far more than that.
I don't know, I guess I was just curious because it could open up a new avenue for exploration that might not have been considered before. Even as a variant of a Paladin there's still a Lot you can do with it.
I don't think the round rules are likely to have much in the way of groundbreaking revelations.
I agree. The questions remaining are mostly around the edges, like: Can I write an Anti-Paladin archetype? Can I include a new Rage Power if it absolutely makes or breaks my Barbarian archetype idea? (Understanding that, yes, word count is precious.) Etc.
And really, it's not so hard to take those kinds of questions out of the equation even at this step by avoiding those kinds of edge cases.
Personally, I'm really interested to see what kind of choices the top 32 make and how voters respond to those choices. For example: archetype for core classes that already have some archetypes vs. APG classes vs. core classes that don't already have archetypes. Or: broader and a bit more generic (e.g. cutpurse) vs. more specific niche (e.g. sandman).
|
|
While I know it's more semantics than anything, "sub" tends to imply less than a full 20 level Class, which the Antipaladin is not... It's a full 20 levels so shouldn't it qualify as it's own "Base Class" for such purposes even if it is another "type", "archetype" even? Though it's definitely not the same sort of archetype rules-wise--it's far more than that.I don't know, I guess I was just curious because it could open up a new avenue for exploration that might not have been considered before. Even as a variant of a Paladin there's still a Lot you can do with it.
Well, according to the APG, it's an alternate class and it states "The antipaladin is an alternate class. Making use of and altering numerous facets of the paladin core class, this villainous warrior can’t truly be considered a new character class by its own right."
So, it's more like an Advanced Archtype? But, considering it does have it's own class progression and abilities of its own that you can switch out, I don't see where an Archtype for the Anti-Paladin wouldn't be impossible. You could do like "Undead Master" or "Mounted Warrior" or some such.
So, to answer your original question. I don't see where it would be against the rules.
EDIT: And as a side note. The Anti-Paladin can only be Chaotic Evil, which -most- PCs in campaigns can't be. I'd stick to an arch-type that people could actually use in a game and say "Yeah, I could see my Rogue using that!"
We've never done archetypes before in RPG Superstar, so we don't have a "don't do this" list like we do after 4 years of magic items.Well, that's not true. You state we can't do new domains, subdomains, alternate classes or subclasses (such as the antipaladin), sorcerer bloodlines, or wizard schools. So you do have some "don't do this". :)
Yeah, in the same way that the "create a wondrous item" round by default has the unwritten rule "don't submit a monster." Which should be pretty obvious, because monsters aren't wondrous items.
New domains, subdomains, sorcerer bloodlines, wizard schools, descriptions of the Battle of Gettysburg, and ASCII drawings of cats aren't archetypes, any more than monsters are wondrous items, or feats are skills. So in the "create an archetype" round, yeah, make an archetype, not something that isn't an archetype. It goes without saying.
It's this sort of ridiculous, nit-picking sort of post that makes me really regret giving ANY guidance beyond what's in the rules because it leads to people questioning everything and me having to re-explain everything. It doesn't matter if you're joking or not. I can't tell if you're joking or not. That's because this year's contest has actually had people arguing that we should make the submission form foolproof for word count so you can't accidentally submit an item that's over 300 words. When we reach that level of absurdity, it's hard to tell when an apparently-absurd comment is genuine. So when you post a nitpick of if you're trying to be funny, it's not funny; if you're being serious, it's a pointless nitpick and doesn't help anything.
Seriously, stop it with the nitpicks. Please.
...
Seriously, stop it with the nitpicks. Please.
Try with "Go to your room!" Sean - That's what I ussually do when I get fed up with my son's nitpicking.
EDIT: :)
Sean:
Respectfully, I don't think anyone is trying to troll, nitpick, or goof on you. They just may have different ideas of what is obvious or makes sense than you do, and in the context of this contest, where you think the lines fall matters a lot.
Case in point (not to resurrect that debate), the max word count being enforced thing. From the standards of your profession, there's one obvious answer to that which is clearly correct. From the standards of my profession, there's also one obvious answer to that which is clearly correct. The problem is, they're not the same answer. Now, it's your show, you have your reasons for thinking it should be a certain way, and what you think is what goes. I completely respect that and yield the issue to Team Judge without reservation -- but at the same time I also know that people coming at it from a different angle are not trying to screw with you. The archetype thing, same deal.
It gets frustrating to answer the same questions fifty times, even multiple times in the same day -- but I hope that on some level you also realize that there are so many people excited about RPGSS and taking it seriously enough to ask questions and care because you (being Team Paizo and Judges Past and Present) have done a great job with it in the past.
...
Personally, I'm really interested to see what kind of choices the top 32 make and how voters respond to those choices. For example: archetype for core classes that already have some archetypes vs. APG classes vs. core classes that don't already have archetypes. Or: broader and a bit more generic (e.g. cutpurse) vs. more specific niche (e.g. sandman).
Aye there's the rub. For in this contest you want to stand out. Or at the very least, beat the contest as much as the contestants, and let that lead to victory like Neil did. On this I keep coming back to SKR's description of Neil's running the race with a 50 pound backpack and still keeping up with the crowd. :) So which base-class is everyone's rock and will enough people make paper to justify creating scissors....?
That sort of meta-gaming is probably unnecessary and doubly hard on the never-been-done-before archetypes. Hence, I stopped spinning my noggin on that and just settled on two I want to write :)
Honestly, I've brought this on myself. By explaining my reasoning in detail, it opens the door for everyone questioning that reasoning, which includes a fringe element making irrational demands for me to explain or justify myself, for "complete transparency," "a foolproof submission process," and so on.
And once that fringe element appears, it becomes increasingly difficult to tell the serious requests from the jokes and irrational requests.
Lachlan Rocksoul, I apologize for overreacting to your post. It's been a long five weeks for me, too. :/
|
|
Honestly, I've brought this on myself. By explaining my reasoning in detail, it opens the door for everyone questioning that reasoning, which includes a fringe element making irrational demands for me to explain or justify myself, for "complete transparency," "a foolproof submission process," and so on.
And once that fringe element appears, it becomes increasingly difficult to tell the serious requests from the jokes and irrational requests.
Lachlan Rocksoul, I apologize for overreacting to your post. It's been a long five weeks for me, too. :/
<shakes hands with Sean> No problems, mate! You're still #1 in my book.